Ibagli

 

The new colours look great, IMHO. Many thanks! --Ultra Megatron 22:17, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

They're wrong. (As in many things, trusting the Government is a rather bad idea.) Much more authoritative sources, like Debrett's Correct Form, show the correct way. (As an online example, this page from the College of Arms website shows "PC" after "CVO", and I'd certainly expect the College of Arms to know what they're talking about.) Proteus (Talk) 16:01, 23 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Honours precede all other post noms PC is an appointment it is not an honour so it goes with QC etc. The DCA site is wrong sadly and various HMSOs publications agree with Proteus as do Burkes and DebrettsAlci12 15:44, 26 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hello Ibagli. Thankyou for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. Regards, ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 01:51, 2 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Your recent edit to North Africa was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot2 14:34, 16 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ibagli, thank you for your interest in VandalProof. I am happy to announce that you are now one of our authorized users, so if you haven't already simply download VandalProof from our main page, install and you're all set!

Please join the VandalProof user category by adding either: (this also places the user box attached) or, to your user page.

If you have any problems please feel free to contact me or post a message on VandalProof's talk page. Welcome to our team! - Glen ^T_C (Stollery) 15:34, 7 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hi there,

I notice that a few days ago you added the Saskatchewan Order of Merit to List of titles and honours of Charles, Prince of Wales. I've checked the offical lists [1] in which Charles is not listed. Due to this I have removed the listing. Do you have a link that states that Charles recieved it ? As far as I knew none of the royal family have ever held the provincial orders which I belive are not headed by the queen by rather by the Lt Governor. Thanks Dowew 14:50, 17 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

I have learned not to trust wikipedia artles for citable info. They are a great starting point, but you should double check before repeating info somewhere else, otherwise incorrect rumor can just snowball. Its pretty simple, just a quick googlesearch for Saskatchewan Order of Merit will turn up the official page. I've always thought it kinda strange that the Queen has never been given any of the provincial orders, particularly when she was in attendance for the first investiture of the Order of Newfoundland and Labrador. Dowew 15:02, 17 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Since you are interested in flags and emblems I would like to inform you that the WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology has just been created. Why not take a look? I hope you can join. Inge 20:43, 11 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the notice. I mainly edited photographes of GGs and LGs for 'His Honour'/'Her Honour' according to the Canadian protocol.Cahk 04:23, 18 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

I've just created a proposal for our Style Guide - HERE - please do discuss it on the talk page // DBD 12:55, 20 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Ibagli! I've just started a poll about Category:British royal titles templates, and would really value your input - please do have your say! Cheers, – DBD 13:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

"Unfortunately, the current MoS prevents "The Right Honourable" and other similar prefixes from being used at the beginning of an article. I've given my views on that matter several times, but to no avail." In that case surely an exception needs to be made in respect of an overseas, non-ennobled, member of the Imperial Privy Council to indicate his or her appointment to it. However, members of the Canadian Privy Council are not "Right Honourable" by virtue of their being Privy Counsellors. When Canadian appointments to the Imperial Privy Council were abolished by the Pearson Government in the 1960s (Prime ministers and Chief Justices of Canada had previously been appointed; it had become anomalous in the case of chief justices when appeals to the JCPC were finally re-abolished in criminal cases and abolished anew across the board in all other cases in 1949 so that chief justices no longer travelled to Westminster to sit on the Judicial Committee) the honorific "Right Honourable" was reinstated as a Canadian honour for prime ministers, chief justices, and certain other eminent persons who are granted it from time to time. Otherwise Canadian Privy Counsellors are merely Honourable. Masalai 03:54, 20 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

[2] - Kittybrewster 21:10, 13 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, that's most likely very nice of you. B.Mearns^*, KSC 00:32, 14 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks here too, I was unaware the image was Fair Use (not that ignorance is an excuse, of course!). Cheers - Wezzo (talk) (ubx) 08:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hello there. Just wondering if you could give some advice on a debate on the Catherine of Aragon page regarding the spelling of her name. There is some heated discussion on the discussion page, could you drop by and add your thoughts?? CheersPaul75 01:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Heho, there was a discussion about this on Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Honorific_Prefixes. Obviously it is used at non-peers anyway sometimes, we also therefore use the PC normally in articles here. Greetings ~~ Phoe _talk 21:12, 25 February 2007 (UTC) ~~ Reply

I reverted your edits because you've removed the DEFAULTSORT template and made a category a red link. Please correct these before applying your own agenda to the article. Thanks, Craigy (talk) 20:47, 5 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Sorry if the word "agenda" sounded a bit arsey. I guess I was trying to say that whatever if was you were adding to the article didn't particularly concern me (only the removals), but tried to put it in the nicest way I could think of :-). Regards, Craigy (talk) 20:52, 5 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

It is my understanding that the degrees of the Gallantry Cross (individual awards) are derived from the level at which a person was cited, e.g. Palm device indicates citation by commander of armed forces ("cited at armed forces level"), Gold Star devide indicates citation by commander of Corps ("cited at corps level") and so on. The higher the level one is cited, the more prestigious the award. However, I did not think the Gallantry Cross as created by Decree No 74-b, 15 August 1950, allowed unit awards. This was created by decree No58/QP/ND of 20 January 1968, and repeats the scheme of degrees but on a collective basis.

My source is a 1969 publication called "Huy Chuong an thuong tron Quan-luc Viet-nam cong-hoa" (literally "Decorations and Medals of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Vietnam"), issued by the "Bo Tong Tham-Muu QLVNCH" (Strategic Technical Directorate of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Vietnam). The National Library of Australia holds a copy (call number VIET 1359, record ID 2828177). If you agree with this interpretation I think this page needs a little correction, and I'd be happy to draft same.

Guran70 03:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi! I see you have put in some time to post full names of those receiving honours recently. Are you open to taking these down again if those being cited feel a little uncomfortable? I know plenty of folk who would rather their full names weren't paraded! I just want to try to promote consensual biographical entries to (1) encourage more to appear in Wikipedia and (2) assist those for whom a degree of responsible anonymity is important.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Shieldman (talk • contribs)

I was just wondering...why did you state that Britain is not the same as the United Kingdom? Nat Tang ^{ta | co | em} 17:00, 12 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

"United Kingdom" is much, much less ambiguous than "Britain." Some will take "Britain" to refer to only the island of Great Britain, without including Northern Ireland. There had been comments on the talk page to the effect that the use of the word "Britain" could introduce confusion, while others held that "Britain" and the "United Kingdom" were synonymous. Those that believe in their synonymity could surely not be upset by the changing of a word to one they believe is equivalent, and those who contend that they are not would surely not be upset by the changing of the word to one that is less ambiguous, so I changed it.--Ibagli (Talk) 17:42, 12 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by adding the bit about the Newark city enclaves; could you explain on my talk page? Thanks! Nyttend 04:59, 16 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Now that you explain it, and now that I'm not half-asleep, I understand...thanks :-) Nyttend 15:41, 16 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Would you mind add some references of the Inter-service decorations of the United States military?

Thank you.--东北虎(Manchurian Tiger) 08:58, 3 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi there, It is an online community. Sometime their info is correct, other times it isn't. It is about 50/50 which is why I stressed it was a rumour. If you have anymore questions please let me know. DoyleyTalk 22:37, 22 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ibagli- I see you've been involved in the editing of Canadian monarchy and on its talk page. There's presently a poll going on regarding the format of the titles for all Commonwealth realm monarchy articles. If you'd like to register an opinion, please do so here. Cheers. --G2bambino (talk) 15:56, 20 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ibagli - first off, thanks for your input at Talk:Canadian monarchy. I've been trying to deal with Thark for some time now, and, as you know, recently filed the Wikiquette alert you commented at.

As he seems to have a general issue with suspecting a number of us, myself primarily, of manipulating cited material in order to put forward an anti-UK point of view, and he has taken his battle against this perceived conspiracy across a number of articles - after being soundly defeated at the last - I requested that he present his arguments in support of these serious accusations before ArbCom so that they may rule on the matter. He, of course, shows no sign of being willing to do so and seems to be promising to continue to cause disruption.

Because of this, I'm starting to prepare an RfC/User at my sandbox. If you'd like to contribute and or make suggestions, please do so. But, more importantly, as WP:RFC/User requires at least two people to have contacted the user in question, either on their talk page or an associated article talk page, and tried to resolve the problem, I wondered if you'd be willing to be that other person, should Thark continue to cause disruption. I'm keeping my fingers crossed he won't, but I've done that too many times in the past to have much faith in it this time.

Thanks. --G2bambino (talk) 02:06, 24 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Tharky seems to have departed. He may have waved goodbye to Wikipedia, with his finger (we can only guess, which one). GoodDay (talk) 17:12, 29 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Dear Sir, you are cordially invited to join a discussion on this matter at WikiProject British Royalty. Yours in anticipation, DBD 16:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

On Talk:Results of the 2008 Democratic Party presidential primaries#SVG Map vs PNG Map there is a discussion about whether to use the SVG or PNG version of the 2008 Democratic Primary Results map. I notice that you've replaced the PNG map with the SVG map on several occasions in this article, so I thought I'd let you know about the discussion so you can add your input. --Bryan H Bell (talk) 07:25, 29 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Welcome aboard, Ibagli. GoodDay (talk) 23:19, 21 March 2008 (UTC) Italic textReply

A tag has been placed on Template:CapPun-US requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:12, 23 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hello Ibagli, as the admin who protected the page Canadian Royal Family I would like to invite you to the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Commonwealth realms#Canadian Royal Family article: advice, comments and criticism. Thanks --Cameron (t/c) 15:14, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Just thought I'd let you know that there's a discussion about the above at the WikiProject, and I'm inviting all of the members to join in DBD 13:35, 30 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Would you mind adding you interests to our "new" member list!? The link is here. Thanks so much! --Cameron (t|p|c) 20:43, 7 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

There is a discussion going on here about a possible expansion of Wikiproject Commonwealth realms to incorporate all the British Empire topics! Please take the time to comment = ). --Cameron (T|C) 18:09, 15 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'm very sorry that I didn't pick that up in my oversight of the diff. I've raised this with the writer of the script. Thankfully, you fixed it soon after. Tony (talk) 07:30, 1 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hiya. For several months now, the article naming for 18th Century British royals has been ever-which-where — all over the shop. In an attempt to solve this, I have prepared a page for discussion: here. Please, please, please come and discuss, even contribute to the Poll. Cheers! DBD 15:31, 24 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

You reverted a number of edits I did with regards to honorific prefixes. While these articles where not biographies, MOSBIO refers to how we write about people, including how we address them, in all articles. However, if you prefer a more clearly general guideline on this, you can check Wikipedia:Writing better articles, section Wikipedia:Writing better articles#Other issues. Fram (talk) 21:43, 30 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Ibagli, I noticed you've changed a number of biography articles to make the subject's post-nominal letters in a large font as opposed to the previously existing small font. I've searched for some kind of guideline on this matter, but came up with nothing. Was there some official reason for your reverts? I've seen the small font used in a good number of articles and, personally, prefer that format. --Miesianiacal (talk) 07:28, 19 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

[3] -- Please help me to understand.--Asdfg12345 23:29, 1 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

hah, it is awesome that know that! Well done, and thanks for explaining.--Asdfg12345 03:40, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

By the way, suggest reading about this man's work, since you have come into contact with this subject. This is highly current, very relevant, overall a very big deal, even in terms of history: [4]--Asdfg12345 03:50, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

If you've some issue with the way I made up the lists of Canadian lieutenant governors, please tell me what it is so that we can work something out and I can then apply it to all the lists; I made some effort recently to bring all ten such pages into a consistent format. You made mention of the size of the numbers - I made them small, as at regular size, they seemed to my eye to distract from the actual name of the individual, which is the more important information; I tried various other methods to rectify this, including bolding the names, but making the numbers small seemed the best resolution to me. You also mentioned the post-nominals template - that was created after a discussion somewhere (I can't now recall exactly where), again, over the size of letters; one camp said strings of full-size post-nominals (with periods) were a distraction to the reader, and another camp said making them small (which I think is 50% of full size) made them difficult to read and was distracting. The template sets all post-noms at a compromise 85% of full size. I should add that I just noticed I contacted you back in January r.e. your reverting of the <small> parameters from around post-nominals; you may well have been in the anti-small camp I just mentioned (?). I'm confused, then, as to why you'd replace the template with <small> now... --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 23:55, 8 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm not in the anti-small camp for lists, I'm in the anti-small camp (including the 85% "compromise") for the leads of biographical articles.--Ibagli (Talk) 02:33, 9 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Well done on your work on the above article. A very interesting, and at times entertaining read. I have tagged lots of things on it in the hope that others will follow up on the good start you have made with well-sourced facts etc. Well done on your work. Regards. Staighre (talk) 21:14, 4 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Howdy Ibagli. I think Elizabeth II of the Commonwealth realms, would've been a better 're-direct' name. GoodDay (talk) 16:37, 29 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Followed your advice & created Elizabeth II of the Commonwealth realms re-direct. GoodDay (talk) 20:04, 29 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hey, Gaijin Ninja here - I saw you created the map for the travels of President Barack Obama (I'm the guy who usually writes-in where he travelled). I have absolutely no idea as to how you make those maps properly coloured in (already tried Paint), so I was hoping you could update the colouring of the map for Norway (and Denmark, in the immediate future). Or perhaps give me a hint as to how? Thanks! Gaijin Ninja (talk) 08:25, 10 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hey, could you please update your map of the Presidential trips of Barack Obama? Denmark should be re-coloured to take into account Barack Obama's two trips to the country. Much thanks. --Gaijin Ninja (talk) 01:53, 24 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

A review to see if Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom meets Wikipedia:Good article criteria has started, and has been put on hold. Suggestions for improvement are at Talk:Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom/GA2, and are mainly to do with coverage and neutrality, and building the lead section. Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom is one of our most high profile and popular articles, attracting an average of over 11,000 readers every day. You have made more than 30 edits to the article, and so you might be interested in helping to make the improvements needed to get it listed as a Good Article. SilkTork *^YES! 12:46, 16 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom/Article title. DrKiernan (talk) 09:08, 18 March 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})Reply

I chuckled when I saw this edit on Pat McGeer, as I've seen all kinds of "alphabet soup", as a lat friend of mine called that stuff, on all kinds of Canadian politician bios; e.g. Gordon Campbell (Canadian politician) and Stephen Harper, whose p.r. people bolstered their lack of real honorifics with academic credentials to give them some (IMO undeserved) "intellectual stature". You're welcome to take a lawnmower to the inhabitants of Canadian politician categories; there's all kinds of them that flout their degrees....I didn't know they were anti-MOS or would have removed them long ago...Skookum1 (talk) 15:44, 15 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

I've removed them from the Campbell and Harper articles, but I invite you to explore the categories they belong to and "go at it"....maybe there's a way to remove degree links/pipes from infoboxes by using a bot?Skookum1 (talk) 16:05, 15 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Did you want to add a picture? - I was at the ceremony and have started uploading some of the images there. Donald Ethell category It was a wonderful ceremony, brought tears to the eyes, one felt like one should clap but it was the wrong type of venue. Please consider suggesting the article for Wikipedia's IN the news SriMesh | talk 03:11, 12 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ibagli. I note you've worked on the post-nominals template I created. I intended the template to use only one size font, so I'm curious as to why there's now an option to have the font either 85 or 100%; with one template offering two size options, the question will inevitably arise: which size is used where and why? Do you have any thoughts on that? --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 04:38, 13 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

The option has been there for 14 months. All I did today was reinsert it after it was taken out, just in case any uses of it had made use of it. As for what you'd intended...--Ibagli (Talk) 04:42, 13 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I see. My question of use still stands, though. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 05:43, 13 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Hgg-001.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 03:23, 23 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, thanks for adding these! Definitely useful information. One quibble: you don't need to split up several citations into several different ref tags when they're all supporting the same element in the article, and you're not using the "ref name" function to reuse a reference. They can be combined within one ref tag, something like how I've changed it here. Cheers, postdlf (talk) 20:24, 11 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hey, I was wondering if you were interested in collaborating on making a map of the countries Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has visited during his term in office? I don't know how to color in the maps (all I have is Paint), but I'd be willing to compile the data for you. Give me a shout if you're interested. Gaijin Ninja (talk) 05:18, 23 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

I've started 2011 Royal tour of Canada, but I'd really welcome any help. Regards, -- Zanimum (talk) 23:20, 25 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

 

The September 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 21:16, 5 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

I would ask that you see http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/geosurvey/pdf/cotwpmap.pdf if it hadn't been taken down from the servers when Strickland left office; it showed the non-paper townships with their original boundaries. They're not fictitious. I can provide a complete citation, in case you care. Nyttend (talk) 03:10, 5 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

It's obvious from it the complete boundaries of the townships, as is not obvious from the current maps. This is how every township article in the state is written; if we were to go with the complication of cities that are separate from their townships, these sections would often be impossible to write, and they would be subject to the ever-likely chance of municipalities becoming separate and the less likely chance of municipalities becoming un-separate, rather than the extremely unlikely chance in modern times of a township's borders being altered versus other townships. Nyttend (talk) 03:40, 5 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

No, different map. Some pieces of land within the complete boundaries of many of these townships are now occupied by cities, as I have already demonstrated. You're simply interpreting these words differently from how they're written, and an incorrect inference from a statement does not make that statement wrong. The bit that you quote on my talk page from the PDF that you link refers to the fact that historic paper townships are included, such as Mill Creek Township in Hamilton County. Nyttend (talk) 03:49, 5 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

 

The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 19:04, 16 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi! I noticed that a couple of months back you changed the information on Dayton International Airport to state that the airport is in Dayton, Ohio and not Vandalia, Ohio. However, while the airport may be referred to as the "Dayton" airport, its physical address is listed as Vandalia. This is verifiable from both the Vandalia, Ohio page here on Wikipedia and on the airport's own website on their map. As such, I have restored it in the infobox to Vandalia, Ohio. ProfessorTofty (talk) 04:29, 26 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

I... see. Should it be removed from the Vandalia, Ohio page that the airport is located there, then? ProfessorTofty (talk) 14:31, 26 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

File:Barack Obama foreign trips.svg needs Senegal, South Africa, and Tanzania added, if you don't mind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.65.234.20 (talk) 23:37, 7 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi, i would like to have your opinion about a discussion which i started here, thank.Kingroyos (talk) 23:13, 27 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

It appears your edit should have been more extensive. The source you added seems to indicate the law amendments that were predicted by the previous version of the article have actually occurred. Jc3s5h (talk) 21:41, 22 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

 

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, Barbados, the Bahamas, Grenada, Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Belize, Antigua and Barbuda, and St. Kitts and Nevis. Since you had some involvement with the Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, Barbados, the Bahamas, Grenada, Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Belize, Antigua and Barbuda, and St. Kitts and Nevis redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. The Theosophist (talk) 13:44, 28 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

I've modified one of your Ohio election maps and want to upload it to Wikimedia Commons. I've completely filled in all districts with party colors. I didn't see it on your talk page on Wikimedia Commons. How should I attribute your work with my modification? Keep up the great work. Mitchumch (talk) 10:25, 3 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

 

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Death of Diana. Since you had some involvement with the Death of Diana redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. --Nevé–selbert 16:50, 11 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

 

Hi Ibagli,

I'm Kevin, one of the founding members of the Ohio Wikimedians User Group. Created in July 2016, we're working to be a central group of Ohio Wikimedians who organize and support offline events, promote the Wikimedia movement in Ohio, build connections throughout our state, and above all, support each other. We already have a handful of members and have worked to support multiple events, including Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States and several Art+Feminism edit-a-thons at universities throughout Ohio.

I wanted to reach out to you and invite you to join the Ohio Wikimedians User Group. Being a part of the user group will allow easy communication between active Ohio editors, notifications of upcoming events in the Ohio area, and, if you're interested, the opportunity to help organize events such as edit-a-thons or workshops. Some notes:

• All members receive a monthly newsletter with recent happenings, upcoming events, and more. Check out our April newsletter here.
• This Thursday at 8:30 EST, we're having our first online meeting. Check out our meeting page here for more details, an agenda, and a section to sign up if you'd like to join us. Topics will include introductions and brainstorming for future projects.

Right now we have a Wikipedia Takes Columbus photo event going on, a Wiknic coming up this summer, and opportunities to attend the upcoming Ohio Private Academic Libraries Conference. If you're interested in joining us, feel free to add your name here - and feel free to reach out to me (or post on the user group's talk page) with questions or discussions. Thanks! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 07:29, 18 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

I created a midi file with Musescore, that might be of interest for You. You can check it here, if You want. I have carefully listened to the sounds of the YouTube-Video named "Big Ben Chime (12) Good Quality Sound" from the channel with the name "BigBenChime", and so I created a midi file, that comes pretty close to the real chimes. --Matthias Brosius (talk) 22:31, 8 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello! I left you message earlier about this on Wikimedia Commons. I created the article on the Conesville Power Plant. The article has been approved on DYKNA: Conesville Power Plant and will be featured on the Main Page very soon. Since you were the person to upload the photo (File:Conesville Power Plant.JPG), I was wondering if you can change the contrast/brightness of the photo. It's difficult to see the structure of the power plant within the article without clicking on the photo. FunksBrother (talk) 13:37, 3 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Nvm. The image has been edited by @Maile66. FunksBrother (talk) 16:13, 12 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

	US Banknote Contest
	November-December 2019
There are an estimated 30,000 different varieties of United States banknotes, yet only a fraction of these are represented on Wikimedia Commons in the form of 2D scans. Additionally, Colonial America, the Confederate States, the Republic of Texas, multiple states and territories, communities, and private companies have issued banknotes that are in the public domain today but are absent from Commons. In the months of November and December, WikiProject Numismatics will be running a cross-wiki upload-a-thon, the 2019 US Banknote Contest. The goal of the contest is to increase the number of US banknote images available to content creators on all Wikimedia projects. Participants will claim points for uploading and importing 2D scans of US banknotes, and at the end of the contest all will receive awards. Whether you want to claim the Gold Wiki or you just want to have fun, all are invited to participate. If you do not want to receive invitations to future US Banknote Contests, follow the instructions here

Sent by ZLEA at 23:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:GeorgePearkes.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:51, 6 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thanks so much for helping to add new CDPs in some county templates! That'll definitely be a big challenge and hopefully there'll be a bot that can update the articles with population data. Though since the source you've linked says the new CDPs are "for Review in the PSAP Verification Phase" it would probably make sense to wait until the data is release and these are final and official, unless there's another document with updates. Certainly appreciate any help with these! Reywas92^Talk 20:01, 26 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:WalterOwen.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 21:26, 5 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

  The redirect King of the United Kingdom has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 30 § King of the United Kingdom until a consensus is reached. . This listing also covers Queen of the United Kingdom. You are being notified because you have contributed to one or both of these pages in the past by changing or setting the redirect target. Thank you! Dylnuge ^{(Talk • Edits)} 23:28, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply